Federal Election Polls

[Smallc]

We may very well be looking at Jack Layton as the 23rd Prime Minister of Canada, not the least thanks to Quebec.

Well that's doubtful.

[ToadBrother]

We may very well be looking at Jack Layton as the 23rd Prime Minister of Canada, not the least thanks to Quebec.

I'm not holding my breath yet, but at the very least, Jack's clearly positioning himself as the kingmaker, if not the king himself.

[Keepitsimple]

We may very well be looking at Jack Layton as the 23rd Prime Minister of Canada, not the least thanks to Quebec.

No way. Michael Ignatieff promised - no coalition.....and that's final.

[Harry]

No way. Michael Ignatieff promised - no coalition.....and that's final.

Come on, don't be so mean to the Tories. Harper will be PM until the Throne Speech.....

[nittanylionstorm07]

Well that's doubtful.

Not really. At this rate, Jack could see the NDP up to 70+ seats and the Liberals down to the upper 60s.

I'm not holding my breath yet, but at the very least, Jack's clearly positioning himself as the kingmaker, if not the king himself.

His strategy this election has been phenomenal.

No way. Michael Ignatieff promised - no coalition.....and that's final.

Ignatieff won't matter anymore after he's burned at the stake for allowing the Libs to drop to third place.

[ToadBrother]

No way. Michael Ignatieff promised - no coalition.....and that's final.

In the hypothetical situation... that is very hypothetical situation of the NDP surpassing the Liberals and then bringing the Tories down over the Throne Speech, then yes, Layton could become PM. I'm not thinking this is likely, but hey, it's now the Middle Of The Election, which is goofy season. Let's see what the landscape looks like in ten days.

What I think is much more likely is the Tories trying to strike a deal with the NDP. Layton seems to be keeping his options open by not committing to bringing down the Government. But I'm sure his support of the Tories will come with a price... or more properly a price tag

[Harry]

Layton's keeping all his options open which is the wise approach at this point. Ignatieff was just interviewed by Mansbridge and looked in particular unsure on the coalition question which made left the overall impression of a weak person. God, why did the Liberals ever pick him as leader?

Edited April 19, 2011 by Harry

[Molly]

Layton's keeping all his options open which is the wise approach at this point. Ignatieff was just interviewed by Mansbridge and looked very weak and in particular unsure on the coalition question. God, why did the Liberals ever pick him as leader?

A collossal ... problem/error/misstep/chasm... to have ruled out formal coalition. I truly wish he'd simply said, "We might. Get used to it. This is Canada, and that's part of how this country works. "

It was being made an issue, and dominating all conversation, but a little more faith in the wits of voters might have been in order.

[ToadBrother]

A collossal ... problem/error/misstep/chasm... to have ruled out formal coalition. I truly wish he'd simply said, "We might. Get used to it. This is Canada, and that's part of how this country works. "

It was being made an issue, and dominating all conversation, but a little more faith in the wits of voters might have been in order.

The real irony is that Harper might do it first. The Tories have forced Iggy to make a ludicrous promise, despite the fact that they're survival may depend on getting friendly with someone in Parliament.

[Dave_ON]

The real irony is that Harper might do it first. The Tories have forced Iggy to make a ludicrous promise, despite the fact that they're survival may depend on getting friendly with someone in Parliament.

I think at this point it is more likely than not that their survival will depend on it. They haven't made any headway whatsoever and if anything have lost ground in both Ontario and Quebec. A majority is a very faint pipe dream at this point, and I'd be surprised if they manage to maintain their current seat count.

[nittanylionstorm07]

The real irony is that Harper might do it first. The Tories have forced Iggy to make a ludicrous promise, despite the fact that they're survival may depend on getting friendly with someone in Parliament.

Problem: Layton's base in the NDP would abandon him if he formed a coalition with the Tories. This wouldn't make sense at all for Layton, especially if he vaults to second place, to give Harper majority control. At. All.

Just look at the Lib Dems in the UK and where they are now after Nick Clegg sold their souls to the Tories. Sure it was good at first... but that was because the majority wanted Brown/Labour out of power. In Canada, the majority do NOT want Harper/Cons to stay in power.

[ToadBrother]

Problem: Layton's base in the NDP would abandon him if he formed a coalition with the Tories. This wouldn't make sense at all for Layton, especially if he vaults to second place, to give Harper majority control. At. All.

I don't buy that for a second. The base would be as thrilled as punch to gain that much power.

Just look at the Lib Dems in the UK and where they are now after Nick Clegg sold their souls to the Tories. Sure it was good at first... but that was because the majority wanted Brown/Labour out of power. In Canada, the majority do NOT want Harper/Cons to stay in power.

What the majority of Canadians want is as clear as mud. I wish both sides would quit using the Royal We over this. Canadians will return a Parliament that will have to align itself somehow. Layton is clearly hedging his bets here, and his base, well, if they find their party getting a handle on power for the first time in nearly five decades an awful thought, they can always remove Jack.

[nittanylionstorm07]

I don't buy that for a second. The base would be as thrilled as punch to gain that much power.

What the majority of Canadians want is as clear as mud. I wish both sides would quit using the Royal We over this. Canadians will return a Parliament that will have to align itself somehow. Layton is clearly hedging his bets here, and his base, well, if they find their party getting a handle on power for the first time in nearly five decades an awful thought, they can always remove Jack.

Here are the options for Jack (this knowing that Harper will get the plurality of seats in a minority):

If second place:

1. Negotiate with the Liberals as majority coalition partner and vote to reject the throne speech in an attempt to become the government.

2. Become the official opposition and continue to spread message, hoping to become minority government/majority in next election.

If third place:

1. Enter in negotiations with Liberals as minority parter in coalition in order to try to prevent Harper from getting into power.

2. Stay at third place and fight for what the NDP believes in.

That's it. There is no way in hell they are going to enter into a coalition with the Tories. It would be political suicide for the NDP.

[Wild Bill]

A collossal ... problem/error/misstep/chasm... to have ruled out formal coalition. I truly wish he'd simply said, "We might. Get used to it. This is Canada, and that's part of how this country works. "

It was being made an issue, and dominating all conversation, but a little more faith in the wits of voters might have been in order.

Oh, I dunno, Molly. I would have freaked out!

The question then would be, how many other voters would have felt the same way? One old curmudgeon like me is no worry to a campaign manager but thousands or hundreds of thousands of like-minded voters, particularly if they are concentrated in critical areas, like Metro Toronto, would be quite another "fish kettle".!

As I've said before, a "coalition of the losers" is quite different from an ordinary minority government, where the party with the most votes still rules. At least to the common man, who couldn't care less about the niceties of constitutional law. I'm not at all convinced that the average Canadian would be tolerant of such a situation. I think he would strongly resent being over-ruled in his choice and would likely become hardened against those Opposition parties forever, or at least until he or she died!

I could be wrong, of course. That's why I've come to the point where I'd actually love to see such a coalition happen! If the people love it then fine and dandy!

If the people get pissed off it would be great fun watching the Opposition parties squirm!

You see, it's easy for pundits on MLW to kick this idea around. We members have ZERO risk with what could happen. Jack, Michael and Gilles have a great deal at risk. They also seem to have more common sense than Dion had! Notice how the last time they talked up the idea they made Dion the front man. If it hit the fan, it would have been Dion who would have taken the brunt of it.

Edited April 19, 2011 by Wild Bill

[TimG]

As I've said before, a "coalition of the losers" is quite different from an ordinary minority government, where the party with the most votes still rules.

I think we need to distiguish between three scenarios:

1) Libs + NDP == Majority

2) Libs + NDP > Conservative

3) Libs + NDP < Conservative

1) would be no problem.

2) or 3) would be problematic since they would have to get the BQ or Tory support on every bill. This makes them beholden to seperatists since the opposition needs to oppose but in the case of 2) they would have legimacy.

3) is the scenario which I think a lot of people would have a problem with.

Edited April 19, 2011 by TimG

[nittanylionstorm07]

As I've said before, a "coalition of the losers" is quite different from an ordinary minority government, where the party with the most votes still rules. I'm not at all convinced that the average Canadian would be tolerant of such a situation. I think he would strongly resent being over-ruled in his choice and would likely become hardened against those Opposition parties forever, or at least until he or she died!

So the average Canadian would be voting for a Conservative minority? 36-39% of the vote is enough to satisfy that?

Sure no one voted for a coalition, but on the other hand, a majority will not support the idea that the Conservatives are deserving of government either.

This is how coalitions in Europe work: two parties with similar yet different ideas get a set of votes each. We can say one gets 33% of the vote, and the other gets 19% of the vote. In order to form a government, they combine with 52% of the popular vote behind the combined parties. Sure the 33% won't get *everything* they want, and same for the 19%....however, they get a lot of want they want and are more satisfied with the outcome than if a party with completely different ideas swept into power.

The problem in the UK is that "19%" party decided to go into coalition with a "33%" party that had very different ideas of how to run the government... that's why the "19%" party lost most of its base support post election. You can't do that and survive as a party.

I'm not sure what is so hard about this for some Canadians (i.e., mainly Tory supporters) to understand. I know coalition governments haven't been commonplace in Canadian history, but that doesn't mean they are either illegal/unconstitutional or wrong. If the Cons were still split with the various iterations of CA/SoCred/Reform/PC parties... I highly doubt their supporters would be complaining as much if any of these formed a coalition with another in order to enter government.

[nittanylionstorm07]

I think we need to distiguish between three scenarios:

1) Libs + NDP == Majority

2) Libs + NDP > Conservative

3) Libs + NDP < Conservative

1) would be no problem.

2) or 3) would be problematic since they would have to get the BQ or Tory support on every bill. This makes them beholden to seperatists since the opposition needs to oppose but in the case of 2) they would have legimacy.

3) is the scenario which I think a lot of people would have a problem with.

With respect to either 2 or 3, depending on the alignment, either the Libs/NDP or the Cons would be forced to receive Bloc support to pass any of their bills.

If 3 happens and the Libs + NDP + Bloc vote down the Con throne speech, the second party will at least have to try to receive the confidence of the house on another throne speech before heading to yet another set of elections.

[ToadBrother]

I think we need to distiguish between three scenarios:

1) Libs + NDP == Majority

2) Libs + NDP > Conservative

3) Libs + NDP < Conservative

1) would be no problem.

2) or 3) would be problematic since they would have to get the BQ or Tory support on every bill. This makes them beholden to seperatists but in the case of 2) they would have legimacy.

3) is the scenario which I think a lot of people would have a problem with.

My problem with #3 or the unstated #4 (a Liberal minority with less seats than the Tories) is that it would be the least stable configuration. The Tories did manage to make having to get support from two parties work from 2006 to 2008, but it's still no easy trick. #3 or #4 could very well spell an election in the fall or early next year, not good by any measure.

I still think there's a chance of Harper trying to get Layton onside. Maybe not a formal coalition, which might be tough for both parties to swallow, but even an agreement to support the Government on confidence motions providing some NDP priorities were met could deliver some stability. I cannot imagine Harper just sitting by and letting the Opposition take him down, so it means some sort of give or take, and from a strategic perspective (as opposed to the, well, let's blunt, meaningless ideological perspective) the NDP is the more sensible partner than the Liberals. The NDP would not have the aspirations of forming a government on its own so ultimately it would be much more trustworthy.

One thing is for sure, everyone is going to have less than a month to decide what exactly they want to do, and with the polls begin to firm up with the Tories nowhere near majority territory, you can be sure they're all thinking about it now. However, because any formulation is going to be influenced by the number of seats, all three Federal parties are playing to get as many as they can.

At the moment, apart from anything else, I'm just hoping the NDP rise in fortunes in Quebec doesn't turn out to be an ethereal fantasy. Not that I'm an NDP supporter by any means, but the idea of a Federalist party finally starting to chip at the Bloc would make this election, apart from any other results, well worth it.

Edited April 19, 2011 by ToadBrother

[cybercoma]

I think people have failed to consider something that could happen if the NDP actually won more seats than the Liberals. The Liberals may vote with the Conservatives on the confidence motions to keep Jack Layton out of the driver's seat.

[nittanylionstorm07]

I think people have failed to consider something that could happen if the NDP actually won more seats than the Liberals. The Liberals may vote with the Conservatives on the confidence motions to keep Jack Layton out of the driver's seat.

What we do know is that if the NDP places 2nd, then a giant cluster is going to happen.

First, Ignatieff would be shown the door quite fast.

Second, the Liberals would then have a choice: go into government with the NDP and try to save face, or vote the Conservatives into government. If the latter, they'd be taking a gamble: if the NDP does well as the Opposition, then you can say goodbye to the Liberals being the main left-of-centre party for quite some time. If the NDP falls flat like the ADQ, then they could triumphantly return to power.... but that's one hell of a gamble.

[Harry]

I think people have failed to consider something that could happen if the NDP actually won more seats than the Liberals. The Liberals may vote with the Conservatives on the confidence motions to keep Jack Layton out of the driver's seat.

That's probably a more likely scenario, because if Jack became PM the Liberals would be finished. They are finished anyway, it is just taking a bit of time.

[Evening Star]

That's depressingly plausible, cybercoma. I would lose all respect for the Liberals if they did that after basically running an NDP campaign. I don't think I'd be alone.

I really agree, Molly. I don't think the LPC would be polling any worse if they had left themselves some room to form a coalition.

Edited April 19, 2011 by Evening Star

[Harry]

The NPD rise in Quebec in not a fantasy as the La presse reporter who was just on Power Play stated.

And I agree with TB Layton will negotiate with everyone and go with whoever gives him the best deal.

[ToadBrother]

I really agree, Molly. I don't think the LPC would be polling any worse if they had left themselves some room to form a coalition.

It was an idiotic thing to do, and now Iggy may have to either wear not being able to form a government, least wise a government with any hope of longevity, or watching someone else pull off a coalition to form the government. He showed such little fortitude at the beginning of this campaign. Rather than explaining over the top of all the Tory rhetoric that our system of government permits more formulations than just majorities and minorities, he might not have gained any seats, but I doubt he would have lost any over it, and he wouldn't have put himself in the obnoxiously awkward position he's in right now. His interview with Mansbridge is agonizing, like watching the political version of a Jackass movie.

[Harry]

Ignatieff has made it clear now but his process to get there has been mindboggling. Talk about getting late to the party.

Liberals could still govern if Harper wins minority: Ignatieff

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/story/2011/04/19/cv-election-ignatieff-national.html#

Edited April 19, 2011 by Harry